Monster Networking

The management at Monster.com, the leading U.S. provider of online recruitment services must decide how they are going with a new business called Monster Networking (MN) launched in late 2003. MN helps users identify other people who can offer career advice. Monster.com management sees MN as: a vehicle for reducing the cost of attracting job seekers to its core matching services and a potential source of revenue subscription. As of early 2005, the performance has been mixed MN. Networkers were deeply … Read more »

The management at Monster.com, the leading U.S. provider of online recruitment services must decide how they are going with a new business called Monster Networking (MN) launched in late 2003. MN helps users identify other people who can offer career advice. Monster.com management sees MN as: a vehicle for reducing the cost of attracting job seekers to its core matching services and a potential source of revenue subscription. As of early 2005, the performance has been mixed MN. Networkers were deeply engaged, but subscription revenue growth was disappointing. In the face of this power Monster.com management must decide whether to continue with their original plan to increase eliminate subscription fees for traffic, expand MN-scale through the acquisition of an online social networking start-up, or simply terminate MN.
«Hide

from
Thomas R. Eisenmann,
Andrew David Vivero
Source: Harvard Business School
20 pages.
Publication Date: Apr 21,, 2005. Prod #: 805 145 PDF-ENG
Monster Networking HBR case solution